|
between the date of the staff report and the hearing) and exhibit 3 (staff information about
<br />appeal costs).
<br />Konrad, Hye, Project Manager, Technology Associates International Corp:`, spoke for the
<br />applicant and submitted exhibit 4 (letter from FAA) and exhibit 5 (Proclamation No. 8460, 74
<br />Fed. Reg. 64585 (Dec. 8, 2009)).
<br />The following persons testified in opposition to the application John Jaworski, President, Cal
<br />Young Neighborhood Assn., Sarah Bennett, Melissa Brotz, Patrick Brotz, Craig McKern, Sheri
<br />Greatwood, Dolores Haddad, Dan Patch, Dan Haddad, Rae LaMarche, JoAnn Lyerla, Francis
<br />Bullis, Jeff Willensky, Jenny Soyke, Randy Prince, Michael Reeder (attorney at law, Arnold
<br />Gallagher Percell Roberts & Potter, Eugene Oregon, representing Northgreen, LLC), Arthur M.
<br />Noxon, PE, Bill Kloos (Law Office of Bill Kloos, PC, Eugene, OR, representing Melissa Brotz and
<br />the Oakway Neighbors Association), and Florence Vollstedt.
<br />Mr. Jaworski submitted exhibit 6 (copy of his testimony). Mr. Brotz submitted exhibit 7
<br />(Oakway Neighbors' statement of health risks). Ms. Soyke submitted exhibit 8 (testimony and
<br />photo). Mr. Reeder submitted exhibit 9 (letter from Arthur Noxon). Mr. Kloos submitted exhibit
<br />10 (letter with attachments).
<br />Mr. Hyle provided rebuttal testimony.
<br />There was a request to hold the record open to allow time for submission of additional
<br />evidence. The hearing official established the following deadlines: June 22, 2011 for submission
<br />of new evidence, June 29, 2011 for submission of rebuttal, and July 6, 2011 for the applicant's
<br />final legal argument. Subsequently, the applicant requested a longer open record period for
<br />submission of new evidence. The hearing official approved this motion and established the
<br />following schedule: July 6, 2011 for submission of new evidence, July 13, 2011 for submission of
<br />rebuttal, and July 20, 2011 for the applicant's final legal argument. Staff provided notice of the
<br />revised open record schedule. There were no objections to any of the materials submitted
<br />during this open-record period; the hearing official accepts all of the materials the parties
<br />submitted during this open-record period.
<br />Documents Considered by the Hearing Official
<br />The hearing official received and reviewed voluminous application materials, referral
<br />comments, the staff recommendation, comments and testimony in many different media to the
<br />hearing official (including lengthy submissions from Willamette Oaks), and the applicant's final
<br />legal argument. Typically, the hearing official lists each document; however the vast number of
<br />documents makes such a list impractical here. City staff has preserved the originals of each
<br />document in the city files.
<br />Description of Planned Unit Development Request:
<br />Hearing Official Decision (PDT 10-2, CU 11-1)
<br />
|